Gregorius v. NPC International, Inc.
Filing
34
OPINION AND ORDER granting 29 Second Motion for Approval of Settlement; adopting and incorporating 32 Report and Recommendations; granting 33 Motion to waive exception period and the period was deemed waived; approving settlement. Plain tiff shall reimburse the Court for costs of the filing fee and of the Marshal within 30 days. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines, and close the file. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 8/2/2017. (RKR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
CHAD GREGORIUS, on behalf of
himself
and
all
others
similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No:
2:16-cv-593-FtM-29MRM
NPC INTERNATIONAL, INC., a
foreign profit corporation,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #32), filed
July 31, 2017, recommending that the parties’ Second Joint Motion
for
Approval
of
FLSA
Settlement
(Doc.
#29)
be
granted,
the
settlement be approved, plaintiff be required to reimburse costs
of the action, and the case be dismissed.
On August 1, 2017, the
parties filed a Joint Motion to Waive Exception Period (Doc. #33)
waiving the 14-day period to file objections.
This motion will
be granted.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings
and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify
the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982),
cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).
In the absence of specific
objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review
factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9
(11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings and recommendations.
636(b)(1).
28 U.S.C. §
The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo,
even in the absence of an objection.
See Cooper-Houston v.
Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro
Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993),
aff’d, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
On August 2, 2016, the Magistrate Judge permitted plaintiff
to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, or costs of
service of process.
(Doc. #6.)
Therein, the Magistrate Judge
indicated that plaintiff could be required to reimburse the Court
pursuant to Local Rule 4.07(b). 1
The recommendation includes a
provision for reimbursement, and plaintiff did not object.
After
conducting an independent examination of the file and upon due
consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts
the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge in its
entirety.
Accordingly, it is now
1
“All persons applying to proceed in forma pauperis shall be
deemed to have consented to the entry of an order by the Court
directing payment of all non-prepaid fees and costs out of any
recovery, including a reasonable attorney's fee if counsel has
been appointed by the Court to represent such person.” M.D. Fla.
R. 4.07(b).
- 2 -
ORDERED:
1.
The parties’ Joint Motion to Waive Exception Period
(Doc. #33) is granted.
2.
The
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
#32)
is
hereby
adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
3.
The parties' Second Joint Motion for Approval of FLSA
Settlement (Doc. #29) is granted and the FLSA Settlement Agreement
and
Limited
Release
(Doc.
#29-1)
is
approved
as
a
fair
and
reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute.
4.
Plaintiff shall reimburse the Court for costs of this
action, including the filing fee and the costs of the U.S. Marshal
for service of process (see Process Receipt and Return, Doc. #17)
within THIRTY (30) DAYS of this Opinion and Order.
5.
The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with
prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this
August, 2017.
Copies:
Hon. Mac R. McCoy
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented parties
- 3 -
2nd
day of
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?